[manuelabeledo]

Suica defaults to express/transit mode in Apple Pay/Wallet. Using it in your phone is as quick as using a physical card.

Express mode can be configured with plenty of other cards as well, even regular credit cards. That's how it works in London. The difference in speed is because of the gates, not the payment system.

[aikinai]

It’s not just the gates; FeliCa is 100–200ms, much faster than all the other tap payment protocols.

[manuelabeledo]

That has nothing to do with the technology in the IC card.

In terms of real life use, a Suica card in Apple Wallet is indistinguishable from a physical Suica card. Suica itself isn't that much different from any other prepaid transit card, so I don't get the hype. This is some early 2000s technology.

Personally, I see no difference in speed when paying with either an Oyster card (London), an EZCard (Taiwan), a Suica Card, or any Apple Wallet card in transit mode.

[aikinai]

Have other protocols somehow updated and made this chart[0] obsolete?

[0] https://atadistance.net/2020/06/13/transit-gate-evolution-wh...

[manuelabeledo]

I think you overestimate the advantage 100ms, tops, has in the real world.

Also, NFC-F is supported in many phones already. Suica cards have no advantage over a phone wallet in terms of speed.

To answer your question, yes, newer (2020s) Mifare based cards are faster than FeliCa ones.

[makeitdouble]

the 100-200ms is a big deal, and it's not some random spec, JR made it a binding requirement to use their system after real world evaluation of the latency impact. So yes, Felica is also sub 200ms for that part.

As a user, there's so much going on when touching a card at rush hour for instance, getting virtually no perceivable latency helps us to focus on the rest (distance, angle, check the screen, distance with the person ahead). As you point out in other comment, of course the design of the whole gate comes into play to help the user deal with it.

It reminds me of the microsoft study on how low the latency has to be to become transparent to the user. Except JR actually cared about their results.

[uguuchan]

The difference is immense between an Oyster or EZCard and a Suica.

The EZCard and Oyster gates often have lines because of how long it takes for the gates to recognize the EZCard; you'll have people queuing up to get into the station. They as a bottleneck where the flow of traffic is interrupted and slowed down to below walking speed.

This is important as it disrupts flow and public transit during rush hour and is unacceptable. You can see for instance in this video, when people are tapping their cards they are slowing down and waiting for the transaction.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TXkKDw3WWU

With Suica/Apple Wallet/NFC-F, there is 0 stoppage or slowing down. You can approach the pace of the gates at walking speed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6GrIQT58ak

This makes a BIG difference for how many people can enter the station at once. With Suica/NFC-F you've essentially removed the station gates as a barrier for traffic flow, whereas with Oyster/EZCard (and EZCard being a HUGE offender) you're introducing barriers to traffic.

It may not matter if you're not at a huge station and you have tons of time, but imagine people constantly filing out of Shinjuku station during rush hour and having to queue up on the stairs outside of the gates just to get in - the delay is unacceptable and a human health hazard. When rush hour happens and someone's card is declined, the second or so it takes for them to back out creates a huge jam and crowding. During large events (for instance, people trying to file in/out of stations for performances), this is especially a problem when people don't have enough money on their cards.

In addition to the latency, Suica & these other IC cards also start the process at a further distance, and also work better through wallets/card holders. EZCards are especially bad at that (and won't work through pretty much anything). This reduces the friction required to take the card out, as people can just tap their whole wallet and it'll go through multiple credit cards as well.

The whole goal is to create a smooth process where you can walk through transit gates without stopping or slowing down, and Oyster and EZCards fail at doing that.

Oyster cards and EZCards are fine low traffic transit solutions but the requirement for walking speed not to be interrupted is why they aren't feasible in Japan. EZCards are especially terrible, as they pretty much need to contact the reader to scan. It's painful to see people coming out of the trains in Taiwan and having to line up to leave the station.

[manuelabeledo]

I think you are conflating many different things here.

NFC-F is widespread. It's not a Japanese thing anymore. Also, the difference in latency between NFC-F based IC cards, and lower end NFC cards, is perhaps 100ms to 200ms, tops.

You seem to think that Suica cards make a huge difference by comparing London and Tokyo flows of traffic, but London underground stations are older, narrower, and less modernized than those in Tokyo. Most stations in London are several decades older than those in Tokyo, poorly maintained, with a handful of gates for hundreds of people coming out at once. It's worth noting that latest Oyster cards are actually based on Mifare Desfire, meaning that they should be twice as fast as Felica cards on paper.

On the other hand, why not compare other systems based on NFC-F, like those in Bangalore or Jakarta?

Ignoring factors such as infrastructure, culture, prevalence of means of transportation, etc., and focus on one hundred milliseconds, is a bit myopic.

[BOOSTERHIDROGEN]

In Jakarta, the MRT and KRL systems use FeliCa technology but also accept Mifare-based cards. The speed difference is significant; FeliCa offers a smoother flow, while with Mifare-based systems, there is a noticeable wait time.